2007/4/16, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/16/07, J.C. Pizarro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The "mea culpa" is to permit for long time to modify "configure" instead of
> "configure.ac" or "configure.in" that is used by "autoconf" and/or "automake".
>
> Another "mea culpa" is don't update the autoconf/automake versions when
> the GCC''s scripts are using very obsolete/deprecated
> autoconf/automake versions.
What world are you living in? Do you even look at the source?
Even though http://gcc.gnu.org/install/prerequisites.html has not been
updated, the toplevel actually uses autoconf 2.59 already and has
since 2007-02-09. And how can you say 2.59 is obsolete when 90-99% of
the distros ship with that version? Plus automake 1.9.6 is actually
the latest version of 1.9.x automake.
Since 2007-02-09, it's the problem, little time for a drastic modification.
So, this drastic modification could have lost arguments or flags or
modified incorrectly the behaviour between before and after.
Because of this, there is not time for releasing or iceing after of this.
libtool on the other hand is the older version but that is in the
progress of being fixed, don't you read the mailing lists?
> Currently, "autoconf" is less used because of bad practices of GCC.
Huh? What do you mean by that?
I don't know anyone who touches just configure and not use autoconf.
Yes at one point we had an issue with the toplevel needing an old
version of autoconf but that day has past for 2 months now.
By example, http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-04/msg00525.html
...
-- Pinski
J.C. Pizarro :)
